TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (2) TMI 648
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... these appeals by the department are directed against the combined order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 25-2-2003 for assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97. Since common issues are involved in all the four appeals, we find it convenient to dispose off all of them by this consolidated order. 2. The main grievance of the department is against holding that where the deposits are not explai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Deposits (Rs.) 1993-94 3,62,419 1994-95 4,70,578 1995-96 7,27,937 1996-97 1,14,537 3. The CIT(A) also rejected the HUF story and held the deposits to be unexplained. However, he accepted the plea of the assessee that only peak credit should be taken as many debits appearing in the account may also have been utilized for making the deposits. The Assessing Officer was directed accordingly.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d applied in the facts of the case is rightly applied or not. It is well established that no income can be taxed twice. It is also not in dispute that these deposits include refunds of the subscriptions made from the deposits. Thus, by aggregating all deposits, they tend to get taxed twice which is against the principles of taxation the decisions cited by the ld. counsel lend support to the case o....